no title

Obama critic ignored historical context

Letters Policy

The Dispatch welcomes letters to the editor from readers. Typed letters of 200 words or
fewer are preferred; all might be edited. Each letter must include name, home address and daytime
phone number.
Dispatch.com also posts letters that don't make it to print in
The Dispatch.

I concluded it is 10 years too late, by failing to even hint at President George W. Bush’s “zero
experience on the world stage” when he invaded the wrong country.

While Williams paints a picture of “being led down the garden path,” she ignores the historical
fact that it was the previous administration that led us there, by attacking a country that had
nothing to do with 9/11. How’s that for being led down a garden path?

Then, huge mistakes managing the war, including, to name just a few, putting unskilled U.S.
civilian Paul (“You know, the country is basically peaceful”) Bremer III, in charge of Iraq
governance, and giving free rein to Vice President Dick (“My belief is we will, in fact, be greeted
as liberators”) Cheney and Defense Secretary Donald (“There are known knowns. These are things we
know that we know, etc.”) Rumsfeld.

How about years of warfare with massive costs in dollars (without sense – pun intended),
horrific Iraqi civilian casualties, more than 4,000 U.S. military fatalities and more than 30,000
wounded, its adverse effect on a more-effective war on terrorism, and even affecting U.S. relations
with other nations in the Middle East?

So, before denigrating the current president of the United States, perhaps Williams should at
least note the complexity of foreign affairs in general and the specific complications created by
President Barack Obama’s predecessor.

It is perfectly reasonable for Americans to have robust discussions about public policy and
foreign affairs, but they should be conducted in the historical context in which they exist.